|
Post by QuantumCrab of '18 on Feb 21, 2018 6:38:39 GMT
My first post here, actually just made an account to comment on this post. Some of the limiting factors that are being suggested I have trouble agreeing with. As we see with Elephants, being one of the most intelligent animals, as well as having very developed emotional, and social responses, could very well be a close contender for a sapient entity. As you mentioned 'hands' don't actually mean hands, but manipulators, and their trunks are just that. Elephants have been shown to cooperate to complete tasks, as well as use and develop tools. What I am getting at is, the largest land mammal (of our time) is also an herbivore, yet has developed through evolutionary pressures, very 'human like' behavior, that I would say is near enough sufficient to constitute sapience if not just below that. Looking forward to replies though x3 Now, the elephant is an interesting case. They are large, yet herbivores. The reason they are able to be this large yet still intelligent is because they spend almost their entire day looking for food. Because of this, if they ever achieved human-level intelligence, they could hardly utilise it as they are spending almost their entire day feeding. But back to the main point. Yes, they could certainly be a sapient creature. I fail to see how your evidence affects my rules. Elephants are large, don't eat meat yet have a perfectly good method to getting enough nutrients, and I explicitly stated that 'hands' referred to anything that can manipulate the world around it. So Elephants can very well be considered a sapient creature as they fit under all of the criteria.
|
|
|
Post by xolorhusd on Feb 21, 2018 12:38:53 GMT
My first post here, actually just made an account to comment on this post. Some of the limiting factors that are being suggested I have trouble agreeing with. As we see with Elephants, being one of the most intelligent animals, as well as having very developed emotional, and social responses, could very well be a close contender for a sapient entity. As you mentioned 'hands' don't actually mean hands, but manipulators, and their trunks are just that. Elephants have been shown to cooperate to complete tasks, as well as use and develop tools. What I am getting at is, the largest land mammal (of our time) is also an herbivore, yet has developed through evolutionary pressures, very 'human like' behavior, that I would say is near enough sufficient to constitute sapience if not just below that. Looking forward to replies though x3 Now, the elephant is an interesting case. They are large, yet herbivores. The reason they are able to be this large yet still intelligent is because they spend almost their entire day looking for food. Because of this, if they ever achieved human-level intelligence, they could hardly utilise it as they are spending almost their entire day feeding. But back to the main point. Yes, they could certainly be a sapient creature. I fail to see how your evidence affects my rules. Elephants are large, don't eat meat yet have a perfectly good method to getting enough nutrients, and I explicitly stated that 'hands' referred to anything that can manipulate the world around it. So Elephants can very well be considered a sapient creature as they fit under all of the criteria. It wasn't so much your rules or stipulations, moreso other mentions of meat eating, and pack hunting to be. Not to delve too much into side tangents or anything, yet I could possibly see that increased digestive efficiency in elephants could let them have more free time, to develop other behaviors outside their current niche. But back to the main topic, do these rules apply generally to singular animals in the species? Or could it also apply when the species works collectively, such as with hives, calculating and reasoning, say when expanding, moving, or like with ants, waging glorious warfare!
|
|
|
Post by QuantumCrab of '18 on Feb 21, 2018 21:26:28 GMT
Now, the elephant is an interesting case. They are large, yet herbivores. The reason they are able to be this large yet still intelligent is because they spend almost their entire day looking for food. Because of this, if they ever achieved human-level intelligence, they could hardly utilise it as they are spending almost their entire day feeding. But back to the main point. Yes, they could certainly be a sapient creature. I fail to see how your evidence affects my rules. Elephants are large, don't eat meat yet have a perfectly good method to getting enough nutrients, and I explicitly stated that 'hands' referred to anything that can manipulate the world around it. So Elephants can very well be considered a sapient creature as they fit under all of the criteria. It wasn't so much your rules or stipulations, moreso other mentions of meat eating, and pack hunting to be. Not to delve too much into side tangents or anything, yet I could possibly see that increased digestive efficiency in elephants could let them have more free time, to develop other behaviors outside their current niche. But back to the main topic, do these rules apply generally to singular animals in the species? Or could it also apply when the species works collectively, such as with hives, calculating and reasoning, say when expanding, moving, or like with ants, waging glorious warfare! Well, these rules always refer to individual organism of a species. With animals like ants and termites, they are not sapient (which probably needs another rule of its own). This does not mean they aren't successful however, it just means they aren't technically sapient. Just like bacteria, or moss.
|
|
|
Post by xolorhusd on Feb 21, 2018 22:00:05 GMT
I suppose we should stick to things that we can see in nature that we can at least conceive as feasible, but, could there maybe be a scenario where hermit like creatures could become sapient? Say if a species became such an apex predator, or efficient grazer, or forager, that such a species has an evolutionary arms race, toward intelligence, reasoning, and self reflection. This competition allowing it to outsmart their competition? This of course would be at odds with pressures to form packs, but, it would be interesting to see, a hyper intelligent sapient super predators at odds with one another, maybe even getting to a stage were they make traps, or weaponry to further compete with one another.
|
|
|
Post by QuantumCrab of '18 on Feb 22, 2018 6:56:18 GMT
I suppose we should stick to things that we can see in nature that we can at least conceive as feasible, but, could there maybe be a scenario where hermit like creatures could become sapient? Say if a species became such an apex predator, or efficient grazer, or forager, that such a species has an evolutionary arms race, toward intelligence, reasoning, and self reflection. This competition allowing it to outsmart their competition? This of course would be at odds with pressures to form packs, but, it would be interesting to see, a hyper intelligent sapient super predators at odds with one another, maybe even getting to a stage were they make traps, or weaponry to further compete with one another. That would technically be possible, but remember, these rules don't mean that something cant become sapient, just what is likely to evolve that way.
|
|
|
Post by xolorhusd on Feb 22, 2018 14:24:31 GMT
Would a creature that is more nomadic, be more well suited to being Sapient? Making reasonable predictions of weather changes, and seasonal changes, and the like. A nomadic creature would also need a strong memory (much like elephants, or humans, or dolphins and whales), for remembering familiar landmarks, smells, and even the different sources of food and how to obtain them in their area. After all to make predictions, or at least educated ones, you need to have the capacity to remember things from your past.
|
|
|
Post by February Steam of Foushoo on Feb 22, 2018 17:24:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by PositiveTower on Feb 27, 2018 0:37:03 GMT
I disagree with the hands because octupuses have tentacles and they still can use tools
|
|
|
Post by QuantumCrab of '18 on Feb 27, 2018 11:30:58 GMT
I disagree with the hands because octupuses have tentacles and they still can use tools Very crudely. Also keep in mind that, FOR THE 100000000th TIME, hands do not refer to human hands, but anything that can manipulate the world around it.
|
|
|
Post by PositiveTower on Feb 27, 2018 11:34:04 GMT
I disagree with the hands because octupuses have tentacles and they still can use tools Very crudely. Also keep in mind that, FOR THE 100000000th TIME, hands do not refer to human hands, but anything that can manipulate the world around it. JEEZ chill bruh
|
|
|
Post by QuantumCrab of '18 on Feb 27, 2018 12:18:50 GMT
Very crudely. Also keep in mind that, FOR THE 100000000th TIME, hands do not refer to human hands, but anything that can manipulate the world around it. JEEZ chill bruh You refrigerate yourself young mister!!!
|
|
|
Post by PositiveTower on Feb 27, 2018 14:26:46 GMT
You refrigerate yourself young mister!!! refrigerate? Like a refrigerator?
|
|
|
Post by QuantumCrab of '18 on Mar 1, 2018 5:00:05 GMT
You refrigerate yourself young mister!!! refrigerate? Like a refrigerator? Get a haircut hippy
|
|
|
Post by PositiveTower on Mar 1, 2018 8:26:03 GMT
refrigerate? Like a refrigerator? Get a haircut hippy Uh Racist
|
|
|
Post by StealthStyleL on Mar 1, 2018 14:34:12 GMT
Please stop arguing you two.
|
|
|
Post by infinitewisdom on Mar 1, 2018 15:27:19 GMT
I shall evolve into the unltimate species, the REFRIGIRATOR!!!, endless food storage. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
|
|